We all lead lives that are defined by factors that cause a condition that is less than ideal, i.e., this editorial is being written under a deadline. Students, teachers, researchers, administrators, all have some pressure being applied from someone or something. We state that we are under stress, what is more likely is that we are adapting to the factors that are moving us from the steady forward motion of our existence. Be that as it may, what I am referring to with the term in the title are occurrences that the biological world applies to plants not people. Plants cannot run from their location; they must stay and adapt, or die. It is rare that plants occupy an ideal situation in their daily experiences through their life-cycle. Even under the best of circumstances humans will come along and remove the fruit formed specifically to reproduce the species, and likely cook it.
There are biotic and abiotic factors that can cause plants to perform at less than their optimum capability. When that happens, humans suffer since the yield is more than likely reduced. Humans need to put definitions to activities and occurrences and what is normally assigned to a sub-optimal condition for plants is that they are stressed. Let us start with a definition from Webster’s Dictionary: “stress (stres), n. 1. Strain, pressure; especially. a) force exerted against a body, that tends to strain or deform its shape, b) …measured in pounds per square inch. c) the resistance … or cohesiveness of a body resisting such force. Skipping to 3) tension; strained exertion. 4) a state of mental or emotional strain or tension resulting from adverse or very demanding circumstances.” The deletions are parts of the definition that relate to other words in the definition but do not affect the meaning. The definitions refer to inanimate objects or humans. One is a physical force and the other a psychological condition. According to these definitions plants cannot experience stress since the type of stress that which is generally referred to in the literature is not a physical force and for the second it is necessary to have self-awareness to experience the discomfort of living in a human world. As of yet there is no demonstrable proof that plants are self-aware. The definition of distress is somewhat closer but also not particularly relevant to plants. Yet in the literature there are numerous reports of plants being stressed by biotic and abiotic factors. The title states something to the effect: “Response of PLACE PLANT NAME HERE to PLACE ABIOTIC OR BIOTIC FACTOR HERE stress on yield”, or some other variable that was measured. The problem is that, regardless of the concern about the word definition, the assumption, and the statement, is that the plants are detrimentally affected by whatever the treatment. This assumes from the start that all the treatments applied in the project caused “stress”. That also means the control treatment, which typically is the absence of the factor causing the plant to perform below optimal levels. In some instances, some of the so-called stress treatments are not harmful, and may provide some benefit to the plant. When that is the case it requires further explanation of why that occurred; something that may not be adequately addressed in the discussion. That would render the title, and the premise of the manuscript, worthless.
Science is about observation and accurately reporting what was measured. To state from the literal first words of a manuscript that there is a foregone conclusion to be reported, when that is almost always not the case, is not a demonstration of accuracy. “On well, you know what I mean”, yeah, I probably do, but that does not abrogate the author’s responsibility to be accurate in the observation and reporting of the data, or any editor’s responsibility to see that misinformation does not appear in a journal. If the term stress is not appropriate what are alternatives? Plants can “adapt to”, “respond to” and show “tolerance to” some level of the factors that adversely affect their physiology, or ability to produce an acceptable level of yield. It is easy to lump responses into a word that is generally understood to have a specific meaning. However, if that meaning is being misused we all, as scientists, have the responsibility to not use the term.
Reviewers of Submitted Manuscripts
In addition to the Editorial Consulting Board, I want to extend my gratitude to the voluntary reviewers who provide their time and efforts to assure that the quality of the manuscripts meets the standards expected by the journal and its readers. They are: V. Afari-Sefa, A.C. Cuevas, A. Ghosh, A. Hasan, A.P. Keinath, M. Ozores-Hampton, S. Petropoulos, R.S. Spehia, and A. Yusuf.